Sarah Palin's Ripping Yarns!

Is it really the media's job to "ask questions," no matter how batty?

It's a question with a depressingly obvious answer, and one asked repeatedly since John McCain (R-Ariz.) announced that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be his running mate: If challenged to expound on the differences between Sunni and Shia Islam, or if quizzed on the three largest cities in Iraq, or the broad details of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just how well would the 44 year-old self-described "hockey mom" acquit herself? By her own admission, Palin hasn't "focused much on the war in Iraq," so it isn't unreasonable to expect shallow and platitudinous foreign policy answers, at this point anyway.

The McCain campaign tacitly acknowledged that foreign policy was not Palin's strong suit when a senior advisor commented that she will, after all, soon "learn at the foot of the master." But her record as governor, her pork-busting accomplishments, campaign surrogates stress, will please economic conservatives and libertarians. As anti-Real ID activist Bill Scannell, an Alaska native, told reason's Matt Welch, Palin "has been a pretty freaking awesome governor." Denver Post columnist and reason contributor David Harsanyi says that "for libertarians—in the broadest sense of the small ‘l' word—she's the best candidate they can expect." And I suppose it is encouraging that, as a 2006 opposition research dossier obtained by noted, with evident horror, Palin has attended at least one Libertarian Party meeting, at a Denny's restaurant in Anchorage.

But as the mainstream media checked her "bridge to nowhere" claims—she was for it before she was against it—a small segment of the blogosphere was chasing a bizarre rumor that Sarah Palin's newborn baby Trig was not her son, but her grandson. "It's the wackiest rumor about Sarah Palin or any other politician so far this election," wrote The Huffington Post's Lee Stranahan. At his Time magazine blog, Tom Bevan observed that "all the major media outlets shied away from repeating this crackpot theory."

Well, almost all major media outlets.

Over at The Atlantic's website, writer Andrew Sullivan, a passionate defender of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), posted a series of breathless blog items laying out the case (if it can be called that) against the perfidious Palin. There was no compelling evidence—circumstantial or otherwise—to support such a claim, but as Sullivan argued, it was the media's job to ask the uncomfortable questions.

So based on a hunch, he requested that the campaign "release Palin's medical records for the past year to rebut for good and all the rumors on the Internets and the very, very strange chronology surrounding the pregnancy and birth of Trig Palin." The onus was on the campaign to address every wild conspiracy theory floated online, he argued: "Why not kill this rumor with Palin's medical records?...Just release them, ok?...And we can all breathe a sigh of relief and move on." The frenzied posts continued: "There must be plenty of medical records and obstetricians and medical eye-witnesses prepared to testify to Sarah Palin's giving birth to Trig." Yet another post, demanding that the McCain people respond to his inquisition: "The McCain-Palin campaign can resolve this now with medical records, as are mandated for presidential candidates anyway." And one final request: "What harm would it do to release the medical records showing that Sarah Palin delivered Trig on April 18 in Wasilla?...So let's have them. And then we can move on."

Even after Palin announced that her daughter was pregnant, Sullivan couldn't exactly move on, and despite the chronological impossibility—to which he was previously so attentive—of the child actually belonging to the governor's daughter, Sullivan proclaimed: "Now all we need is confirmation from the obstetrician who delivered Sarah's baby, Trig."

At BeliefNet, "crunchy conservative" Rod Dreher was aghast at Sullivan's obsession with Trig's maternity: "Honestly, this kind of thing from someone whose work I often disagree with, but who I respect, leaves me speechless." Democratic strategist and blogger Jerome Armstrong, who in 2006 co-authored a book with the Daily Kos's Markos Moulitsas, denounced Sullivan for "pushing this nonsense" and equated the rumor with bogus questions about the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate

Questions of Palin's competence and experience, the thoroughness with which she was vetted, and her associations with a batty Christian church are not only legitimate but necessary. And it is probably worth noting that I share many of these concerns. But to camouflage a descent into partisan gutter sniping as the practice of journalistic due diligence is deeply disingenuous. On his blog, Sullivan dryly commented that McCain campaign outrage was itself outrageous: "The press is asking question. In other words: doing their job." Later, he wrote, "The job of a press is to ask questions which have a basis in fact."

What reporters do, as Sullivan surely knows, is ask important questions and address rumors by reporting, and only bringing them to readers' attention upon confirmation. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the crackpot conspiracy theories surrounding the death of Vince Foster contain compelling questions of motivation, chronology, etc.—all conspiracy theories, from the JFK assassination to the 9/11 "truth" movement do.  But it's worth calling out those grinding partisan axes—such as the "reporters" at Insight magazine who claimed that Obama was educated in a madrassa, which Sullivan rightly denounced as "sleazy"—who are dodging their critics by claiming that they are "just asking questions."

But rather than puffing his chest about the media's responsibility to seek the truth, Sullivan, as Byron York pointed out, forgot about the media's duty to actually engage in old-fashion reporting: "What is amazing about all this is how making just one phone call to a man like [Ancorage Daily News reporter Michael] Carey could have given some of the bloggers at The Atlantic and DailyKos pause before they wrote so extensively about it.  Why didn't they do that?" It's a good question, though one with a disappointingly banal answer: There now exists an idea that bloggers, as part of the broader media landscape, "ask questions" and demand "answers,"

In June, after both Republican and pro-Clinton bloggers spread rumors of a videotape featuring a fulminating Michelle Obama denouncing "whitey," Sullivan responded by quoting science blogger Jonah Lehrer: "Not only are we persuaded by false rumors that get repeated, but we're persuaded even when the false rumors get repeated by one person...That's why one popular and persistent blogger...can do so much damage."

A fair point, yes, Andrew?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Andrew Sullivan is an excellent editor. But he has crossed the line from journalist to outright partisan for Obama. The attacks on Palin are completely out of control. You can just see him hyperventilating as he types. And then when enough people call him on his ridiculous behavior, he tries to rise above it and make various rationalizations. Will we ever be free of this nonsense?

    Know hope.

  • Anonymo the Anonymous||

    Hours before the Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Paulin

    Wishful thinking?

  • ||

    Andrew Sullivan is a cunt.

    If he would like to refute this charge of mine, then he should release all of this medical and financial records, as well as those of his parents, grandparents, and all siblings, first and second cousins.

    I'm open to arguments that Sullivan is actually an asshole, but he doesn't have the balls to be a prick.

    -jcr (Fuck Yeah!)

  • ||

    He is one of the worst cheerleaders in the American political class.

  • Alvin Anders||

    I was chair of the Alaska Libertarian Party briefly in the 90's. When we reached permanent party status by getting 2% of the registered voters to register as Libertarians, Sarah Palin, then mayor of Wasilla, was the only elected official of any party to congratulate us. She did so in person by stopping by our booth at the Alaska State Fair.

  • Djyrn||

    It's their job to ask questions; battiness is inevitable.

  • Nick||

    Some basic facts about Down Syndrome should have made Sullivan think twice before publishing this silly theory: most cases of Down Syndrome occur in pregancies in the declining years of the menstrual cycle. Thus it is highly likely that it would occur in a 44-year old's pregnancy and highly unlikely it would occur in a 17 year old's. He should have done a lot more investigation and compiled a strong case case before making himself look like an idiot by expounding a wild theory with little basis in scientific fact and in the face of plenty of corroborating evidence that Palin was indeed pregnant.

  • JGR||

    Wasn't Sullivan one of the people who excused "The President with the Bent Crank" for perjuring himself, saying that it was "just about sex" -- while ignoring the fact that the lies were made in order to deflect criminal prosecution?

    Perhaps Palin could shut down people like Sullivan by just suggesting that Clinton is the father!

  • Warmongering Luantic||

    I think we have reason to ask if Andrew Sullivan has AIDS-related dementia. I know some argue that posing such a question would be offensive, but it's the job of the media to ask questions of public media figures. He can silence the question at once by simply releasing his medical records, after all.

  • ||

    Wait, wait, wait.

    All of this yammering I've been hearing about "the liberal media" writing up this story, and it was self-proclaimed conservative libertarian Andrew Sullivan?


    Look, I know, Andrew Sullivan Isn't A Real Libertarian® but he sure as hell isn't the liberal media, either.

  • Charles||

    It's the testosterone:

  • modd||

    With a record like that I predict Sullivan to be a future (w)anchorman.

  • ||

    Sullivan has a good point and is right not to be satisfied by bare claims from the McCain-Palin camp.

    The fact is McCain and Palin tried to misrepresent and manipulate us. Their "game plan" was, admittedly, not to disclose the Bristol pregnancy until (1) after the RNC; and (2) after they had engineered the Bristol-Levi wedding rites. Then, she could more safely, and more palatably, be presented to the public as a married, pregnant "woman." they wanted to present Bristol, Willow, Trig, et al. as just an admirable, large American family with no skeletons in those closets.

    Unfortunately for them, they couldn't carry off the misrepresentation. But the fact that they had to come (somewhat) clean cannot, by any means, eliminate the need to be totally on guard against further mendacity on the part of McCain-Palin. They need to be held to account. Show us your medical records, Sarah, demonstrating the extent of the pre-natal care you took of your special needs child. Show us the birth certificate, confirming the current, revised version of the story you're now putting out.

    What's unreasonable about that?

  • Alan Vanneman||

    Well, I would like to stand up for Andrew, sort of. When he isn't gassing about his beagles or Provincetown or religion or trying to sell his book, he's pretty much OK.

    As for Gov. Palin, she did wait until she was 7 months pregnant to announce the fact, as I understand it. According to those cunts at the Washington Post, Palin experienced labor pains during her eighth month while on a trip to Texas. She flew from Dallas to Anchorage and then got in a car and drove 45 miles to a hospital outside the city to undergo induced delivery. I've never been pregnant, so maybe that's SOP, but I wonder. A 45-mile car ride on top of a 1,500 mile plane flight? Hey, what's another hour, eh?

    As for Brittany, or Willow, or whatever, during the past school year, she left home to move in with an aunt in another city. This is a family that likes to travel.

    Do we know the daughter is 5 months pregnant? Were they going to tell us she was pregnant until they were forced to? Gov. Palin has lied about plenty of things.

    Republicans huff about about teenage sex and single moms. Remember Dan Quayle picking a fight with Murphy Brown, accusing the show of glamorizing single momhood? The current VP has a daughter who is a single mom (Mary Cheney can't marry her SO unless she moves to Mass.) and the VP nominee has a daughter who in all liklihood was banging her honey at age 16. (Gee, what's the statutory rape law look like in Alaska?) And Republicans say that her getting knocked up humanizes her. I've already used this gag before, but what would Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, et al. have said if Chelsea got pregnant at age 17?

    And, by the way, is Andrew any more pumped against Palin than Matt Welch is against McCain? How many posts has he had in the last week saying McCain is full of it? A hundred? Or was it two?

  • modd||

    BTW Joe,

    It's cool to have liberal apologists teach me what Libertarianism is about but no thanks (begone with your trademark, first sign you don't empathize) Libertarianism is live & let live. Deal with it.

  • ||

    ACtually I think this is all helping McCain/Palin. The democrats and the media are falling all over themselves to come up with something on Palin and I think it is actually bringing a lot of sympathy for Palin. Many people that are on the fence about who to vote for may look at her as someone that seems a lot like them, not some Ivy league eltist. If they feel like she is getting a raw deal from the media they may be more likely to back her and in turn McCain.

    While she certainly has some faults, this may be a brilliant move by McCain, if the democrats and media continue to act like spoiled children who aren't getting their way.

  • ||

    Mr. Sullivan has become something of a major jerk. He was always a minor jerk and is insufferable as a person. But of late he has gone completely off the deep end. He is pompous and self-centered to the maximum and he has this tendency to get ideas in his little brain which he holds by faith -- he's very big on faith, no doubt because faith allows one to assert anything. And it takes a lot of hard experience slapping him around a bit before he wakes up to his previous errors.

    Unfortunately it takes a long time for him to realize he was wrong and only minutes to make up new crap. So the crap accumulates and the stench around him grows on a daily basis.

  • modd||

    Christians beget children, legit or otherwise, get over it. Ideally beyond marriage, but 'the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.'

    Get over it. It's not hypocrisy. Christians love life, unlegit (even disguised as legit) or legit. They just think abortion sucks.

    You can disagree with this fairly on existential grounds, but you cannot disagree on the same grounds. Get over it. Hopefully our gov't will reflect this some day. OOPS, like what goes on today essentially.

  • ||

    This is what I don't understand. If Andrew Sullivan truly wanted the GOP side to lose and Obama to win, he'd be thrilled that they nominated a weak VP candidate.

    Why won't he stop attacking her? Because this is all part of a very bizarre internal psycho drama that was kicked off by George Bush's anti-gay marriage amendment. If none of that had happened, Andrew would be completely on-side and trumpeting her (he loves Thatcher after all). Instead, he turned against himself, and now, like all these other born-agains (eg. Arianna), he's more vicious than even the most dyed-in-the-wool Berkeley liberals.

    PS If Sarah Palin really did come by to congratulate you Alvin, she has gone up in my estimation 1000-fold.

  • ||

    Everybody needs to get over, and deal with, "it."

    modd sez so.

  • ||


    Trig is NOT her daughter. Trig is her second son.

  • ||

    Thank goodness we don't have to listen to any boring crap about income tax policy.

  • Mad Max||

    There you go again, P Brooks, trying to distract the masses with tax policy and turn our attention away from the vital issues of the day.

  • shecky||

    The democrats and the media are falling all over themselves to come up with something on Palin and I think it is actually bringing a lot of sympathy for Palin.

    The Dems/libs/media/Sullivan have come up with a good deal of dirt on Palin. Mostly stuff not relating to her daughter's pregnancy. The problem is that conservative leaning folks like Moynihan, McArdle, etc are too busy pointing the finger at the pregnancy story to notice.

    Which is all fine by me. A good sex scandal that involves minors makes an otherwise boring election interesting. Sully's thought about the media asking batty questions was sooo yesterday, and petered out almost as soon as it was born. What did the Republicans expect? In the google age, McCain left it to the public to vet his VP choice. Some of the stuff didn't stick. What's interesting is that an awful lot of stuff does.

  • ||

    The issue is a legitimate one: did Sarah lie, deceive, or coverup the fact of Bristol's pregnancy (first or second?), purely to preserve her own political credibility ... or to bask in unwarranted adulation?
    The question takes on relevance when there are absolutely NO pictures in existence showing Sarah Palin pregnant during the period (and the latest 'pregnant' picture was taken a month ago, not in April).
    Two facts stoke the speculation, justifiably:
    As Andrew notes, *one* piece of paper would have eliminated all doubts immediately. A legal document that cannot be easily fabricated: Trig's birth certificate. This is a public document that *should* be available at the Alaska on-line directory. It isn't.
    Second, nobody in the Palin family claims that Bristol is five months pregnant. The assertion is made by an *anonymous* McCain PR agent, with the *explicit* purpose of "proving" that Bristol could not have given birth four months ago. No evidence, but forceful directions to the physician to *never* speak to the press about it.
    Yes, the story may be totally false. But, it is a perfectly appropriate question that relates directly to the candidate's honesty, integrity, and transparency. I'm with Andrew: we deserve to see evidence.

  • robc||

    batty Christian church

    The hottest chick I have ever known was the daughter of an AoG minister.

  • ||

    Whatever the criticisms, I'm just blown away by how much of an asshole he has become. His live-blogging was churlish, petty, full of contempt and devoid of any class. Screw him. And I really hope he gets some blowback for it.

    PS I used to love the guy. What happened?

  • ||

    Before Westmiller heads off into uterus-truther-land, he(?) asks:

    The issue is a legitimate one: did Sarah lie, deceive, or coverup the fact of Bristol's pregnancy

    I dunno, did she? Before raising the question, perhaps you should have some kind of prima facie case that she did so? As I understand it, Bristol's pregnancy was no secret back home in Wasilla, so I seriously doubt it.

    We're not idiots here (for the most part). We don't fall for the "well, prove you don't rape puppies" routine. You've got some reason to think Sarah lied, put it out there. Otherwise, STFU.

  • shecky||

    It's unclear if Sarah lied, or even if it matters. The issue regarding the pregnancy is this, as Ross Douthat puts it:

    Does the storm over Sarah Palin call John McCain's judgment into question? You bet it does. The McCain campaign should have seen at least some of this coming, and if it didn't persuade them not to pick her in the first place, they should have been better prepared for the inevitable press frenzy. Trying to keep her daughter's pregnancy secret was folly; having GOP spokesmen claim that Palin's role as CinC of Alaska National Guard's qualifies as real foreign policy experience was a terrible idea, etc. etc.

    These are the criticisms of McCain/Palin I see over and over again from Dems/libs/media/Sullivan. They are valid criticisms.

  • ||

    Did John McCain knock up her daughter? For a guy who's never had sex with a woman, Sullivan seems awfully curious.
    Shecky--grow up, dude.

  • ||

    There are some allegations that are circumstantial. That doesn't put them in "truther-land", if they can easily and quickly be dismissed by one simple fact which every proud mother is happy to show to anyone who asks. Not here.
    Or, just give me one picture that would clearly "show" what any female politician would happily display for every news photographer in the world. None exist.
    Yes, it would be malicious and tedious to demand evidence that isn't readily available.
    Yes, it would be a crass smear to allege something that could not be easily disproved.
    When those simple facts are not available, or they're intentionally hidden, people have a right to ask ... particularly of a person who might sit in the Oval Office some day.

  • shecky||

    I find the Reason brand of libertarians to generally be realists. But the Reason reaction to this Jerry Springer moment shows a significant blind spot to the reality of such political theater. This makes me sad. This kind of stuff happens every election cycle. And in between. Yet for some reason, now it's gone too far.

    Rachel Cohen: Grow up???

  • ||

    The chicken shit part of what Andrew Sullivan does is that his blog doesn't allow comments. So all the comments overflow to Megan McArdle, and she has to deal with wing nuts that Sullivan appeals to. I really think he hates women.

  • JB||

    Did Sullivan beat his husband last night?

    Who knows? But we have to ask these tough questions.

  • Orange Line Special||

    Everyone knows Sully is an idiot, but here's an example of the Washington Post sinking to DailyKos level.

    Lots of sites have since simply regurgitated their tale.

    Please write their ombudsman (email at the first link) with your thoughts.

  • Jim Hu||

    Instead of poring over photos of Palin and her daughter, a few nanoseconds of thinking would blow this idea out of the water. Trig was diagnosed prenatally, which, AFAIK involves amniocentesis: i.e. an ultrasound-guided insertion of a fricking needle into the womb to withdraw fluid and cells for karyotyping.

    This strikes me as really, really hard to fake.

  • alan||

    ACtually I think this is all helping McCain/Palin. The democrats and the media are falling all over themselves to come up with something on Palin and I think it is actually bringing a lot of sympathy for Palin.

    I don't read minds, at least not at a distance, but I have little doubt that if Obama had his way, the media would shut the hell up about the matter. When the story is Republican versus Democrat, the split is about fifty fifty who has the upper hand in the given outcome (depending on the zeitgeist), when the story is Republicans versus the media, the Republicans win every time. McCain ought to send you a dozen roses, Sally Quinn.

  • alan||

    with a note attached:

    "Thank you for being you."

  • ||

    The hottest chick I have ever known was the daughter of an AoG minister.

    I remember one very well-proportioned Mormon girl I encountered right after high school. She almost made me wish I could believe her mythology.


  • ||

    Interesting that someone at the Huffington Post claimed that no reputable media outlet published the story. I happened to be following this all day Sunday. After the Daily Kos started the rumor, the HuffPo immediately picked it up and rand it prominently on their front page all day long. When the story was debunked early in the evening by a TownHall blogger, HuffPo suddenly took the story down.

  • ||

    I've already used this gag before, but what would Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, et al. have said if Chelsea got pregnant at age 17?

    Don't excuse this behavior by what someone else might have done. Don't base your morality on someone else's whatifs. It's wrong in this case and wrong in the other.

  • Unclaimed Mysteries||

    The timing of the release into the wild of the bizarre "Palin is the grandmother" story and its easy debunking fascinates me. The bogus story's demise partially blunted the impact of the actual story when it came out.

    Who could have orchestrated such a thing? Only one man:

    EVOR LRAK!!!!~~!!11`1`1AAAAIEEE!

  • Eric Haskell||

    This is a little off-topic, but while researching Sarah Palin, I found this.

    It's a statement by her in support of jury nullification, and establishes a "Jury Rights Day" in Alaska.

    The most relevant part:

    It is the right and responsibility of the trial jury to decide on matters of law and fact.

  • Lajaw||

    Eric- we can't stand that. After all, she attends a "batty Christian church". Those Christians are all batty?

  • ||

    All I know is that Palin cant seem to keep a lid on her own family (ahem letting the teenage daughter sleaze around and get knocked up) so how the heck is she suppsoed to lead a country? LOL I thought not.


  • God help me...||

    ... that's a worthwhile LoneWacko post.

  • ||

    Is Andrew Sullivan the Al Sharpton of the liberal media? Seriously, when did "Andrew Sullivan is an ass" become worth of full article? What's next, "Steak: Delicious and meaty"?

  • ||

    I can not believe how pathetic you have to be to actually pursue the "it's actually not her baby" line. I can't care less about Palin but it is just indescribably, incandescently pathetic. Sullivan is a wretch, and has been for some time, but this is a new low even for him.

  • ||

    "All I know is that Palin cant seem to keep a lid on her own family (ahem letting the teenage daughter sleaze around and get knocked up) so how the heck is she suppsoed to lead a country? LOL I thought not."

    Jiff, I'd rather not have a politician "keep a lid" on my country or me and mine. Thank you very much.

  • Eric S||

    What's really despicable about Andrew Sullivan's behavior in all this is that he has the moxie to play the gay victim card -- albeit it sarcastically -- when he denounces his critics b/c they blame his HIV-induced neurosis for his antics.

  • ed||

    bloggers...partisan attacks

    Well I never. Partisanship in the blogosphere?
    But seriously, this election will do more to expose the sham of blogospheric "journalism" than anything to date. Present company excepted, of course.

  • ||

    'A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women, noting Palin's opposition to abortion rights and support of other parts of the social conservative agenda, told Politico, "She's more a conservative man than she is a woman on women's issues. Very disappointing." '

    I guess this is no surprise coming from NOW, but apparently Palin is not really a woman because she holds the wrong position on 'women's issues."

    Although not a surprise, still very annoying.

  • ||

    Where are the requests by the media asking for the DNA of Obama, Michelle and kids to see if Obama is really the father of the children?

    Where are the requests by the media asking if Michelle has ever had abortions?

    Since Obama is an admitted illegal drug user, why shouldn't he be subjected to media-monitored, weekly random drug tests?
    And where are the media requests for detailed medical records from Obama - is there a drug overdose/addiction he is hiding?

  • ||

    Awesome post! You should see the garbage that Politico is puting out today!

  • Palin: Small Government Conser||

    Alaska Operating Budget (in Millions of USD)
    FY 2007 Authorized 5728.8
    FY 2008 Governor's Proposal 6223.1
    FY 2008 Authorized 6593.7
    Fy 2009 Governor's Proposal 6698.1
    Percent Increase 2007-2009 16.92%
    Average Annual Growth Rate 8.13%

  • ||

    Jiff Lewis writes:

    "All I know is that Palin cant seem to keep a lid on her own family (ahem letting the teenage daughter sleaze around and get knocked up) so how the heck is she suppsoed to lead a country?"

    I honestly can't believe that "progressives" are pushing this particular strain of self-serving bullshit. Are we supposed to believe that the authoritarian Christian matriarch was expected to rule over her childrens' sexuality with an iron fist, stifling all sexual freedom and sexual expression, and that she would be ought be rightly derided by sexually-progressive "progressives" for her failure to do so? Is this what all "progressives" expect of the parents of 17-year-old children?

    Yes, that's why "progressives" have been 100% committed to the abstinence-only education which Sarah Palin has obviously failed at instilling, thus proving she is a lousy mother, since all mothers should insist on total abstinence to the point of strict control over every aspect of their children's lives.

  • ||

    "The Dems/libs/media/Sullivan have come up with a good deal of dirt on Palin."

    No, that's exactly the point, they haven't, but they are in a psychotic mood acting as if some sort of scandal has happened, although no real scandal has surfaced. The only really good political point they have is that she flip-flopped on the bridge (although in the right direction).
    The other stuff is pure junk:

    • Was member of Alaskan separatist party: Seems to be no proof of this.

    • Only has 2 years experience as governor, mayor of small city not hard core: Fair point. But Obama has roughly the same level of experience and a lightweight history in the state senate, and he is running for PRESIDENT, not VP. Anyone who accepts Obama's experience as sufficient for the presidency must logically accept Palin's for the lower threshold job of VP. It's that simple.

    • Husband had DUI 22 years ago: Pathetic, and irrelevant. If the actions of the spouse of the vice president 22 years ago matter, why isn't Obama disqualified for his sniffing blow 20 years ago?

    • Internal family fight: Irrelevant. Again if what her relatives do privately is the standard for electing the president, should conservatives go after Obama's half-brothers, or dig up dirt on Joe Biden's extended family? Of course not.

    • Was not wetted, because we didn't get to hear about daughter's pregnancy: Circular reasoning. Since the daughters pregnancy is not a political scandal not knowing about it is not a cower up (anyway McCain did know, apparently, and rightly decided it didn't matter).

    • Has 5 children: Doesn't seem to have held her back so far. Why was having small children not a scandal for Obama, or having a large family not a problem for Romney? By the way, if we were living in Afghanistan and husbands culturally never pitched in one could accept the point, but we are not.

    • Alaska Republicans hate her: Good, these people seem to be corrupt morons.

    I kept thinking given all the excitement the media knew something and were not telling us, like corruption or infidelity. But it seems they really had just gone insane.

  • Katablog||

    What on God's green earth causes any of you to believe you have the "right" to know that a candidate's daughter is pregnant? How does this fact relate to the fitness of the candidate to serve? Why is it that an acting president can lie about having sex in the oval office with an employee and that's no one's business even when he outright lies to the entire nation on national television (because that's private) yet you feel entitled to know on day one that the VP candidate's under-aged daughter is pregnant? And in the mean time it's okay that some blogs make up stories about this young girl and the parentage of her younger brother.

    Oh hypocrites get a life! Stop this insanity. Yes, Sarah Palin has certain beliefs. That doesn't mean that her daughter 1) shares those beliefs or 2) doesn't ever make a mistake regardless of her belief. May I remind you hypocrites that it is you who wants to keep religion out of politics - so stay to the same standard. Christians aren't perfect, non are candidates' children (ask Al Gore and Jimmy Carter).

    The "questions" asked about Sarah Palin the last couple of days have not been about her political experience or even her beliefs. They have been outrageous and totally unappropriated. Just when will you begin asking such questions about Barack and Michelle Obama or plagiarist Joe Biden?

  • J P||

    This is the reason for the presumption of innocence concept in the law. The party making a claim must have the burden of proof and not the party being accused.

    Imagine the situation that would ensue if everyone had to prove their "innocence" against every claim. I could, for example, claim that Sullivan is a child molester and then demand that he prove he's not. Even if he manages to prove a negative, not an easy feat, the damage from the mere accusation stands.

    The ability for a group on the left to resort to feats of mental masturbation to prove a point (no matter how illogical) never ceases to amaze me.

  • Nanny||

    Consider this. Sarah is the Governor of Juneau, that is where her Governors house is located and where she works. Yet according to mapquest, Wasila, where Trig was born is 20 hrs by car from Juneau. Did Sarah plan on getting on a plane to see her doctor? This was a high-risk pregnancy, Down's baby with 44 yr old woman, well out of reach of a FP, even Doctor of the Year, who was the Obstetrician that Sapphire Jewelry? Why would she go to Wasila to see her FP, was she the one managing the pregnancy all along. Was her plan to hop a quick plane ride to Wasila to deliver the baby?

  • ||

    As soon as Obama releases his medical records, more than a page, maybe the Dems can then ask for Palin's.

  • glenncz||

    Consider this. Sarah is the Governor of Juneau, that is where her Governors house is located and where she works. Yet according to mapquest, Wasila, where Trig was born is 20 hrs by car from Juneau. Did Sarah plan on getting on a plane to see her doctor? This was a high-risk pregnancy, Down's baby with 44 yr old woman, well out of reach of a FP, even Doctor of the Year, who was the Obstetrician that she saw? Why would she go to Wasila to see her FP, was she the one managing the pregnancy all along. Was her plan to hop a quick plane ride to Wasila to deliver the baby?

  • glenncz||

    here i have it all figured out now!
    Does Sarah have 4 or 5 children. We "the people" need a simple fact check! If you want to know the truth about the Sarah Palin pregnancy HOAX, check out this website which has all the links and facts/lies in one place. Give yourself an education and then you can judge for yourself!

  • ||

    This may sound mean and far-fetched, but it would explain alot. Rather than seek medical records for Trig's maternity, perhaps it would be worth considering testing his paternity - or at least looking at the timing of Gov Palin's lobbying trips to Washington last year. Sorry to sound so crass, but much stranger things have happened, and she IS very ambitious - without any qualms about putting her teen daughter's pregnancy on the international stage.

  • Nanny||

  • ||

    lac, you really have to kidding,right? Yea it would be rough to have a 17 year old daughter's misfortune laid out for the world to see, but that is only temporary. How would she handle that fact that her "mistake" cost her mother the chance of a lifetime, a run for the VP of the United States? And really folks, Trig, paternity test... Tucan Sam, meet Fruit Loops..


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.